What Reggie Bush’s NIL lawsuit means for NCAA, USC and Pac-12

Former USC running back and 2005 Heisman Trophy winner Reggie Bush is synonymous with college football.

That very sentiment is why Bush is suing the NCAA, his alma mater and the Pac-12 Conference over lost name, image and likeness compensation. ESPN’s Paolo Uggetti was first to report the lawsuit’s filing on Monday.

Bush’s lawyers told ESPN that he is attempting to recoup his share of profits the school, NCAA and Pac-12 Conference made from his talents even after he left for the NFL “without any acknowledgment of his contribution.”

“This case is not just about seeking justice for Reggie Bush,” Evan Selik, an attorney representing Bush, said in a statement to ESPN. “It’s about setting a precedent for the fair treatment of all college athletes. Our goal is to rectify this injustice and pave the way for a system where athletes are rightfully recognized, compensated and treated fairly or their contributions.”

What does Bush’s lawsuit mean for NIL?

Bush, a first-round pick of the New Orleans Saints in 2006, was estranged from USC after the NCAA stripped the program of 14 victories, including the 2004 national championship and Bush’s Heisman Trophy in 2010 over allegations of impermissible benefits given to him and his family when he played.

In 2020, Bush mended his relationship with the school and his Heisman Trophy was returned by the NCAA. His retired No. 5 is displayed again in the Los Angeles Memorial Coliseum.

However, that rekindled connection, which included talks for Bush to potentially lead the team out of the tunnel for a game this season, appears to be strained again with this lawsuit, per ESPN.

The adoption of NIL compensation by the NCAA in 2021 prompted Bush to lobby for his Heisman to be reinstated.

Earlier this year, the NCAA settled multiple antitrust lawsuits that opened the door for schools to directly pay athletes for NIL. (That settlement is currently on hold pending approval by a federal judge).

The antitrust settlement conceded NIL payments could be offered to athletes as far back as 2006, something that’s currently being challenged by former Michigan football players and might have inspired Bush’s suit.

Bush played at USC from 2003-05, just before the settlement’s cutoff date because of the statute of limitations.

So, it’s entirely possible that the merit of his case could be linked to the fate of the Michigan case. Even so, Bush’s lawyers might argue that he was so large a public figure that it’s impossible to deny that the three entities named in the suit made profits off his NIL.

One certainty is that the NCAA’s legal headaches are far from over. It faces a difficult path forward to figure out how student-athlete compensation (past, present and future) is going to work.